Is Obama Reagan or Carter?

[Bo]

Reagan. Both of them share very similar circumstances in regards to the economy. Both of them inherited a recession which worsened during their first 1-2 years. Afterwards, the economy began to improve during the last 2-3 years of their first term, allowing them to get reelected. (And Obama will be reelected). In contrast, Carter came into office during an economic recovery, which continued for three years and then the economy went into a recession during the last year of Carter's first term. I also don't see a foreign crisis developing under Obama as it did under Carter.

You don't see a foreign crisis developing?

What's Afghanistan? What's Iraq? What will Iran be? Maybe even add N. Korea to this list?

Oh. Right. Bush's problem because he didn't deal with them properly, apparently.

Right. Well. It's irrelevant what Bush did or didn't do. It's now Obama's problem. And to say he currently has NO foreign policy problems is wrong, and to suggest he won't accumulate more within 2 more years is so naive.

What is wrong with you?

Obama won't win re-election because, even if the economy is somewhat better, the unemployment rate still be sh**t.

He won't have us out of Afghanistan, and most likely still in Iraq (Whether or not I agree with either policy is irrelevant here)

Gitmo? (I want it to remain open, but most don't. Come 2 years from now it will probably still be open).

Obamacare will be proven to be a flop.

Illegal immigration will be proven to have been mishandled.

The deficit?

All in all, Obama will have proven to be the idiotic candidate all of us naysayers said he would be in 2007/2008. He'll lose on the economy, but his other policies will have gone down the drain too.

Anyone who thinks Obama stands any chance at this rate is simply idiotic. Something drastic needs to happen within the next 2 years for him to be re-elected. And other than a terrorist attack, I can't see that happening.

Goodbye Dems in 2010. Goodbye Obama in 2012. Thanks for ing up your party. GOP shouldnt have had any chance in 2012 bc of Bush, thanks for giving us an opportunity. Pelosi and co are proper idiots.

I hate to say it, but he's right. The Dems are screwed.

Don't count your chickens before they hatch. Get back to me on this in late 2012, then maybe I'll believe it.

[Sbane]

Reagan. Both of them share very similar circumstances in regards to the economy. Both of them inherited a recession which worsened during their first 1-2 years. Afterwards, the economy began to improve during the last 2-3 years of their first term, allowing them to get reelected. (And Obama will be reelected). In contrast, Carter came into office during an economic recovery, which continued for three years and then the economy went into a recession during the last year of Carter's first term. I also don't see a foreign crisis developing under Obama as it did under Carter.

Actually, in terms of inflation, there was improvement by this point.

Obama is more like Carter, because both started out high and declined.

Unemployment-wise, Reagan and Obama are pretty similar so far.

Why are you assuming unemployment will go down? If there is another recession in late 2010/early 2011, I doubt unemployment will be down to 8.5%(which is the magic number I think) by 2012.

I doubt a second recession will start so soon after the first one. That typically occurs very rarely.

Early 80's? Even the Great depression had two steps down.

[Donald Trump’s Toupée]

Reagan. Both of them share very similar circumstances in regards to the economy. Both of them inherited a recession which worsened during their first 1-2 years. Afterwards, the economy began to improve during the last 2-3 years of their first term, allowing them to get reelected. (And Obama will be reelected). In contrast, Carter came into office during an economic recovery, which continued for three years and then the economy went into a recession during the last year of Carter's first term. I also don't see a foreign crisis developing under Obama as it did under Carter.

You don't see a foreign crisis developing?

What's Afghanistan? What's Iraq? What will Iran be? Maybe even add N. Korea to this list?

Oh. Right. Bush's problem because he didn't deal with them properly, apparently.

Right. Well. It's irrelevant what Bush did or didn't do. It's now Obama's problem. And to say he currently has NO foreign policy problems is wrong, and to suggest he won't accumulate more within 2 more years is so naive.

What is wrong with you?

Obama won't win re-election because, even if the economy is somewhat better, the unemployment rate still be sh**t.

He won't have us out of Afghanistan, and most likely still in Iraq (Whether or not I agree with either policy is irrelevant here)

Gitmo? (I want it to remain open, but most don't. Come 2 years from now it will probably still be open).

Obamacare will be proven to be a flop.

Illegal immigration will be proven to have been mishandled.

The deficit?

All in all, Obama will have proven to be the idiotic candidate all of us naysayers said he would be in 2007/2008. He'll lose on the economy, but his other policies will have gone down the drain too.

Anyone who thinks Obama stands any chance at this rate is simply idiotic. Something drastic needs to happen within the next 2 years for him to be re-elected. And other than a terrorist attack, I can't see that happening.

Goodbye Dems in 2010. Goodbye Obama in 2012. Thanks for ing up your party. GOP shouldnt have had any chance in 2012 bc of Bush, thanks for giving us an opportunity. Pelosi and co are proper idiots.

I hate to say it, but he's right. The Dems are screwed.

Don't count your chickens before they hatch. Get back to me on this in late 2012, then maybe I'll believe it.

Sigh. You're the one predicting that unemployment will be lowered to ~7.5% in 2 years time!

[Mr.Phips]

Reagan. Both of them share very similar circumstances in regards to the economy. Both of them inherited a recession which worsened during their first 1-2 years. Afterwards, the economy began to improve during the last 2-3 years of their first term, allowing them to get reelected. (And Obama will be reelected). In contrast, Carter came into office during an economic recovery, which continued for three years and then the economy went into a recession during the last year of Carter's first term. I also don't see a foreign crisis developing under Obama as it did under Carter.

Actually, in terms of inflation, there was improvement by this point.

Obama is more like Carter, because both started out high and declined.

Unemployment-wise, Reagan and Obama are pretty similar so far.

Why are you assuming unemployment will go down? If there is another recession in late 2010/early 2011, I doubt unemployment will be down to 8.5%(which is the magic number I think) by 2012.

If there is another recession in late 2010/early 2011, unemployment will be closer to 10% in late 2012.  8.5% unemployment in 2012 is likely if we only get 3% GDP growth for the next 27 months. 

[tpfkaw]

Lyndon Johnson.

[Donald Trump’s Toupée]

Lyndon Johnson.

LBJ showed us that it was stupid to focus heavily on domestic policy at the same time of fighting major wars. Obama hasn't learned.

I still see Obama as Carter 2.0 in every regard - how he came into office, his naivete once he was in office, and how he will be voted out of office after 1 year.

[MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!]

1. I can't believe this thread as is.
2. The majority so far said Reagan? Yeah, ok. Good luck with that.

An unknown inexperienced liberal who is voted into office only because the previous administration tarnished the GOP, and for no other reasons. Has no clue with foreign policy and is more apologetic than reactionary. Does a terrible job with the economy, as well.

Well, Reagan was rather simple-minded dude, who won only because of previous administration unpopularity. He had no clue about anything beside 1940s B-movie scenarios.

[JoeyJoeJoe]

Carter, because Obama is trying to do some good for the country (except on security issues).